High-energy (such as, but not limited to, x-rays) can be used to develop images of a target (such as a person or inanimate object) that reveal structures that are not visible to the naked eye using the visible-light spectrum. The prior art also explains how such technologies can discriminate between the various materials that might comprise the target. By one approach, for example, multiple energy levels can provide corresponding information that permits discrimination amongst, and/or identification of, the class of materials that comprise a given target.
Materials discrimination finds use in various application settings. Such teachings are particularly useful, for example, when quickly assessing the contents of checked airline baggage, a cargo container, a truck compartment, or the like. In many cases, an end user can observe a rendered image of the target that utilizes variations in the rendering to convey information regarding the discriminated materials. As a simple example, one can utilize the color blue to identify metals of a first class (such as medium-Z materials (for example, steel, brass, iron, nickel and many other non-radioactive materials)) and the color red to identify metals of a second class (such as high-Z materials (for example, tungsten, lead, gold, and a variety of radioactive materials such as uranium and plutonium)).
Unfortunately, such discrimination capabilities are not always utterly reliable. In many cases there can be degrees of uncertainty regarding the identity of a particular material. Such uncertainty, of course, can be of lesser or greater importance depending upon the application setting and/or the material in question.
Unfortunately, many present rendering techniques provide essentially no information in these regards. Typically, the rendered image of the target simply reflects the best available assessments of the constituent materials. As one possibly-strained example for the sake of illustration, such a process may be 40% certain that a given part of a target is material A, 30% certain that the given part is material B, and 30% certain that the given part is material C. Though in sum total the process could be said to actually not be certain at all about what this given part is made of, such a process might nevertheless render a corresponding image that portrays the given part as being made of material A since that is the best guess, relatively speaking.
While useful for many application settings, there may well be contexts where such an approach leaves more to be desired in these regards.
Elements in the figures are illustrated for simplicity and clarity and have not necessarily been drawn to scale. For example, the dimensions and/or relative positioning of some of the elements in the figures may be exaggerated relative to other elements to help to improve understanding of various embodiments of the present invention. Also, common but well-understood elements that are useful or necessary in a commercially feasible embodiment are often not depicted in order to facilitate a less obstructed view of these various embodiments of the present invention. Certain actions and/or steps may be described or depicted in a particular order of occurrence while those skilled in the art will understand that such specificity with respect to sequence is not actually required. The terms and expressions used herein have the ordinary technical meaning as is accorded to such terms and expressions by persons skilled in the technical field as set forth above except where different specific meanings have otherwise been set forth herein.